A) they are driven by an overwhelming sense of individualism
B) they have entered the workforce at a much earlier age
C) they have embraced a business culture of stability
D) they are pessimistic about their economic future

17. What is said about Europeans society in the passage ?
A) It has fostered the trend towards small families.
B) It is getting closer to American –style capitalism
C) It has limited consumer choice despite a free market ,
D) It is being threatened by irresistible privatization

18. According to Paragraph 3, the newest group of singles are _______.
A) warm and lighthearted B) on either side of marriage
C) negative and gloomy D) healthy and wealthy

19. The author quotes Eppendorf to show that ______.
A) some modern women prefer a life of individual freedom
B) the family is no longer the basic unit of society in present-day Europe
C) some professional people have too much work to do to feel lonely
D) most Europeans conceive living a single life as unacceptable

20. What is the author’s purpose in writing the passage ?
A) To review the impact of women becoming high earners
B) To contemplate the philosophy underlying individualism
C) To examine the trend of young people living alone
D) To stress the rebuilding of personal relationships .

Passage Three
Questions 21 to 25 are based on the following passage .
　　Supporters of the biotech industry have accused an American scientist of misconduct after she testified to the New Zealand government that a genetically modified (GM) bacterium could cause serious damage if released .
The New Zealand Life Sciences Network , an association of pro-GM scientists and organizations , says the view expressed by Elaine Ingham , a soil biologist at Oregon State University in Corvallis .was exaggerated and irresponsible .It has asked her university to discipline her.
　　But Ingham stands by her comments and says the complaints are an attempt to silence her. “They’re trying to cause trouble with my university and get me fired .” Ingham told New scientist.
　　The controversy began on I February , when Ingham testified before New Zealand’s Royal Commission on Genetic Modification , which will determine how to regulate GM organisms . Ingham claimed that a GM version of a common soil bacterium could spread and destroy plants if released into the wild .Other researchers had previously modified the bacterium to produce alcohol from organic waste .But Ingham says that when she put it in soil with wheat plants , all of the plants died within a week .
　　“we would lose terrestrial (陆生的)plants…this is an organism that is potentially deadly to the continued survival of human beings ,”she told the commission. She added that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) canceled its approval for field tests using the organism once she had told them about her research in 1999.
　　But last week the New Zealand Life Sciences Network accused Ingham of “presenting inaccurate , careless and exaggerated information” and “generating speculative doomsday scenarios(世界末日的局面) that are not scientifically supportable”. They say that her study doesn’t even show that the bacteria would survive in the wild , much less kill massive numbers of plants. What’s more, the network says that contrary to Ingham’s claims , the EPA was never asked to consider the organism for field trials .
　　The EPA has not commented on the dispute .But an e-mail to the network from Janet Anderson , director of the EPA’s bio-pesticides(生物杀虫剂)division , says “there is no record of a review and/or clearance to field test” the organism .
Ingham says EPA officials had told her that the organism was approved for field tests , but says she has few details .It’s also not clear whether the organism , first engineered by a German institute for biotechnology , is still in use .
Whether Ingham is right or wrong , her supporters say opponents are trying unfairly to silence her .
　　“I think her concerns should be taken seriously .she shouldn’t be harassed in this way,” says Ann Clarke .a plant biologist at the University of Guelph in Canada who also testified before the commission . “It’s an attempt to silence the opposition .”21. The passage centers on the controversy _______.

A) they are driven by an overwhelming sense of individualism
B) they have entered the workforce at a much earlier age
C) they have embraced a business culture of stability
D) they are pessimistic about their economic future

17. What is said about Europeans society in the passage ?
A) It has fostered the trend towards small families.
B) It is getting closer to American –style capitalism
C) It has limited consumer choice despite a free market ,
D) It is being threatened by irresistible privatization

18. According to Paragraph 3, the newest group of singles are _______.
A) warm and lighthearted B) on either side of marriage
C) negative and gloomy D) healthy and wealthy

19. The author quotes Eppendorf to show that ______.
A) some modern women prefer a life of individual freedom
B) the family is no longer the basic unit of society in present-day Europe
C) some professional people have too much work to do to feel lonely
D) most Europeans conceive living a single life as unacceptable

20. What is the author’s purpose in writing the passage ?
A) To review the impact of women becoming high earners
B) To contemplate the philosophy underlying individualism
C) To examine the trend of young people living alone
D) To stress the rebuilding of personal relationships .

Passage Three
Questions 21 to 25 are based on the following passage .
　　Supporters of the biotech industry have accused an American scientist of misconduct after she testified to the New Zealand government that a genetically modified (GM) bacterium could cause serious damage if released .
The New Zealand Life Sciences Network , an association of pro-GM scientists and organizations , says the view expressed by Elaine Ingham , a soil biologist at Oregon State University in Corvallis .was exaggerated and irresponsible .It has asked her university to discipline her.
　　But Ingham stands by her comments and says the complaints are an attempt to silence her. “They’re trying to cause trouble with my university and get me fired .” Ingham told New scientist.
　　The controversy began on I February , when Ingham testified before New Zealand’s Royal Commission on Genetic Modification , which will determine how to regulate GM organisms . Ingham claimed that a GM version of a common soil bacterium could spread and destroy plants if released into the wild .Other researchers had previously modified the bacterium to produce alcohol from organic waste .But Ingham says that when she put it in soil with wheat plants , all of the plants died within a week .
　　“we would lose terrestrial (陆生的)plants…this is an organism that is potentially deadly to the continued survival of human beings ,”she told the commission. She added that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) canceled its approval for field tests using the organism once she had told them about her research in 1999.
　　But last week the New Zealand Life Sciences Network accused Ingham of “presenting inaccurate , careless and exaggerated information” and “generating speculative doomsday scenarios(世界末日的局面) that are not scientifically supportable”. They say that her study doesn’t even show that the bacteria would survive in the wild , much less kill massive numbers of plants. What’s more, the network says that contrary to Ingham’s claims , the EPA was never asked to consider the organism for field trials .
　　The EPA has not commented on the dispute .But an e-mail to the network from Janet Anderson , director of the EPA’s bio-pesticides(生物杀虫剂)division , says “there is no record of a review and/or clearance to field test” the organism .
Ingham says EPA officials had told her that the organism was approved for field tests , but says she has few details .It’s also not clear whether the organism , first engineered by a German institute for biotechnology , is still in use .